# Thread: Avoiding parity errors in 4x4x4?

1. ## Avoiding parity errors in 4x4x4?

I was wondering, is there anyway I can avoid getting the parity errors on the 4x4x4 cube? I'm not too keen on memorizing the extremely long algorithm's =)

2. Nope and tough, learn them.

They aren't really hard and you get into a rhythm.

3. Learn K4 method

4. Originally Posted by 04mucklowd
Learn K4 method
still has OLL and PLL parity.

5. Unless you want to cheat then there is no way to avoid them, that's way they don't allow more than one logo on any cube in the WCA.

6. Ah, I see, I see. Guess I'll just have to keep practicin' then. Cheers =)

7. Originally Posted by crazymanjimbo46
Unless you want to cheat then there is no way to avoid them, that's way they don't allow more than one logo on any cube in the WCA.
There IS a way to avoid it, but it's too hard/lengthy for speedcubing.

And parities aren't that long, you could have learnt them in the time it took you to make this thread.

8. Originally Posted by Karma Cat
I was wondering, is there anyway I can avoid getting the parity errors on the 4x4x4 cube? I'm not too keen on memorizing the extremely long algorithm's =)

Not for Kirjava.
Spoiler:
Actually...I thought about how to avoid parity issues on the 4x4 and I realized that although there really is only permutation parity, with redux it seems like 2 different parities.

I dealt with the orientation parity by using ZZ. by pairing the edges and placing them oriented on the sides (using M freeslice) you could guarentee that those edges were oriented. After solving the EOline there are only 4 edges left to pair, which can be done in 2-3 algs.

Then I had to worry about the "PLL parity". I found that if the blocks were solved ZZ style and the corners done with COLL, the LL edges can be solved with parity, with only 5 more algs (1 being the standard PLL parity alg).

This results in a 2LLL all of the time, compared to the possible 4LLL with Fridrich Redux, and has a significantly lower movecount (20 if I remember correctly) which is shorter than the OLL parity algorithm.

But, because I have left ZZ for Roux, ZZ blockbuilding and COLL won't be used by me again, so I abandoned this idea, very well knowing that it could be extremely fast, faster than K4 even (don't say I didn't warn you Kir).

9. Originally Posted by miniGOINGS
Originally Posted by Karma Cat
I was wondering, is there anyway I can avoid getting the parity errors on the 4x4x4 cube? I'm not too keen on memorizing the extremely long algorithm's =)

Not for Kirjava.
Spoiler:
Actually...I thought about how to avoid parity issues on the 4x4 and I realized that although there really is only permutation parity, with redux it seems like 2 different parities.

I dealt with the orientation parity by using ZZ. by pairing the edges and placing them oriented on the sides (using M freeslice) you could guarentee that those edges were oriented. After solving the EOline there are only 4 edges left to pair, which can be done in 2-3 algs.

Then I had to worry about the "PLL parity". I found that if the blocks were solved ZZ style and the corners done with COLL, the LL edges can be solved with parity, with only 5 more algs (1 being the standard PLL parity alg).

This results in a 2LLL all of the time, compared to the possible 4LLL with Fridrich Redux, and has a significantly lower movecount (20 if I remember correctly) which is shorter than the OLL parity algorithm.

But, because I have left ZZ for Roux, ZZ blockbuilding and COLL won't be used by me again, so I abandoned this idea, very well knowing that it could be extremely fast, faster than K4 even (don't say I didn't warn you Kir).
you are basically 100% wrong. First off, there's still the standard OLL and PLL parity in the K4 method. Second, even if you use ZZ, you still encounter both types of parity during solving. Odd edge parity can happen no matter what method you use, you just happen to notice it earlier when using ZZ. As for using more algorithms to solve PLL, that can be done with standard reduction as well, if you use COLL. The problem is that there aren't any decent algs for O/W perms, which makes doing it in one look almost worthless.

10. Originally Posted by masterofthebass
you are basically 100% wrong. First off, there's still the standard OLL and PLL parity in the K4 method. Second, even if you use ZZ, you still encounter both types of parity during solving. Odd edge parity can happen no matter what method you use, you just happen to notice it earlier when using ZZ. As for using more algorithms to solve PLL, that can be done with standard reduction as well, if you use COLL. The problem is that there aren't any decent algs for O/W perms, which makes doing it in one look almost worthless.
Basically, yea I am. I know about the odd pairing, and I know about the LL part too. I had 12 (I think) turn O Perms. I understand what you're saying, it's a very crude way to avoid parity (mostly because it doesn't really at avoid it at all), this is just how I tried to tackle them without having seperate parity steps.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•